[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] web: Donations and leaks

compn tempn at twmi.rr.com
Fri Dec 9 18:34:46 CET 2011

On Fri, 9 Dec 2011 16:48:04 +0100, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>On Fri, Dec 09, 2011 at 10:47:51AM +0100, Benjamin Larsson wrote:
>> On 12/09/2011 06:26 AM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>> >On Fri, Dec 09, 2011 at 05:17:39AM +0100, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>> >>---
>> >>  src/index |    9 +++++++++
>> >>  1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>> >>
>> >>diff --git a/src/index b/src/index
>> >>index 6b45428..0dd2850 100644
>> >>--- a/src/index
>> >>+++ b/src/index
>> >>@@ -32,6 +32,15 @@ with the latest developments by subscribing to both the
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>  <h1>News</h1>
>> >>+<a id="donate2011"></a><h3>December 12, 2011</h3>
>> >note, ill push this prior or at the date above if i hear no objections
>> >before
>> Well I object, we have the FFmtech foundation that can handle donations.
>Ill wait with the wikileaks donation suggestion until theres a
>consensus about wikileaks but,
>Skiping all the numerous controversies around the foundation and
>instead just looking under the "line".
>since the creation of the foundation it has probably received 100k
>donations (pure guess as nothing is publically known)
>In the same timeframe to the best of my knowledge (i could have
>forgotten something) the current ffmpeg developers have received
>less than 500 Euro, and i remember one of the libav
>people complaining even about that. Where the rest of the money went
>is not publically known.
>Above and the various controversies have also caused me to withdraw
>my candidacy as director earlier this year.
>Please dont take offence but theres no way by which i could support
>FFmtech handling ffmpeg donations with the current board of directors.
>Neither past, current nor future donations.
>Even without all the skiped controversies and there are enough to fill
>a book, we just get nothing back from ffmtech, so its completely
>useless for me to support it. donating to wikileaks, the salvation
>army or doctors without borders is simlpy a better idea IMHO.

i couldnt get ffmtech to even talk to me about buying a $100-$200 2tb
incoming hard drive for mplayer+ffmpeg. even after inquiries spanning
months to multiple people and mailing lists, irc channels, including
private emails and chats to benjamin larsson, ronald, diego and
possibly another that i forgot. i dont want to put blame on
individuals, the entire organization is at fault for not having good

nor could i get ffmtech to compensate martin for his 'sponsored'
one-line bug fix. i think the proposal i submitted was actually voted
on and declined. what is ffmtech saving its money for if not
compensating for development?

whatever communications they have are secret even to other developers
within the projects. this is terrible because developers are the best
people to ask for what needs to be done in the projects. communications
with the public for sponsored tasks or sponsorship requests/ideas are
non existent. trying to get ffmtech to sponsor its own website
administration (ffmtech.org is still dead) instead of relying on
donated time by developers has also fallen on deaf ears.

i had trouble getting replies from ffmtech board applicants to
answer some questions of mine reguarding how they would communicate and
sponsor tasks if elected.

alex converse answered my question in a private mail:

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 12:22:28 -0700, Alex Converse wrote:
>Here is my proposals plan: Have the person requesting funding send a
>detailed proposal with like shown above with a cost and a timeline
>attached to me or to libav-devel. I will present it to the board and
>make sure it gets voted on.
>I think sending proposals to both lists should be sufficient to get
>them noticed. I don't think adding a separate proposals list or bug
>tracker is necessary but if you have a compelling argument why it
>should be done I will listen.

and yet, my other ideas have not been acted upon or replied to, even
when posted to the mailing list. nor has anyone asked me about my
previous proposals and ideas. like compensating ruby for his j2k work
due to GSoC communication problems.

there is no public forum for ffmtech board questions and my mail was
rejected from the Ffmtech-board-election at ffmpeg.org mailing list.
michael also had trouble posting his question/proposal to ffmtech (i'm
guessing rejected due to being a moderated list) :

On Wed, 8 Jun 2011 22:37:24 +0200, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>The reason for this late proposal is because i did not know there
>where just 9 candidates until recently and because i tried
>to mail that suggestion to the election ML unsuccessfully.


to summarize, i object to anyone suggesting ffmtech is a useful
donation for the ffmpeg project due to it's past and current
communication problems.

even if they told me all my ideas were crap, i would say that at least
they fixed their communications problem.


More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list